Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-17-2000I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Sue Singer called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM ~: Chair Sue Singer, Vice Chair Rich Wagner, Councilmember Trish Borden, ~: Mayor Chuck Booth, Chief Bob Johnson, Chief Jim Kelly, Plan. Dh'. Paul Krauas, PW Dh'. Christine Engler, Recycling Spec. Danielle Pulliarn~ Solid Waste Sup. Sharon Conroy, Guests Dan Bridges-Waste Mgmt/RST Disposal, Laura Moser-Waste Mgmt/RST Disposal, Jerry Hardebeck-Waste Mgmt. and Secretary Jeanne Herold II. CONSENT: ~: Paul Kmuss asked for eppmval of Ordinance No. 5421. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to accept an allocation of grant funds in the amount of one hundred sixty thousand six hundred forty-nine ($160,649.00) dollars from the U.S. Depadment of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration which grant requires a ten percent contribution ($17,849.00) fi.om the City to fund an Airport Master Plan Update and to acquire and install perimeter fencing on the west boundary of the Auburn Municipal A/rport, authorizing thc execution of the grant agreemcnts and approving thc expenditure and appropriation of said funds. Paul Kranss explained that the Airport has a master plan update in their work program for this year. It's an FAA funded program in the amount of $160,000 and it's going to take about a year to complete the project. What the staff would like to do is work primarily on the west side of the airport, which would include the possibility of improving the taxiway. Auburn has a rather unusual one-way taxiway system, which is relatively narrow, and the airport is getting slightly larger aircraft now requiring a wider taxiway. The City has received a $45,000 grant fi.om the Washington State Bureau of Aeronautics. Trees on the lef~ side of the runway need to be cut down and security fencing needs to be extended. With the development of Auburn Corporate Center, the airport is quite open now and there isn't any security. Bids went out for the tree cutting and it's more expensive then originally thought. It came in at about $35,000 which did not leave sufficient funding' to complete the fencing. The FAA basically volunteered that they would add funds to the master plan grant to complete the fencing. The cost of these two projects is projected to be $178,499.00. The FAA is offering to pay $160,649.00 (90%) to help fund these projects with the remaining share of $17,849 (10%) coming from the Airport Budget. Mr. Krauss was asking the Committee for approval to accept the grant. Municipal Services ComnUttee Meeting 1 July 17, 2000 Vice Chair Wagner made a motion to recommend approval of Ordinance No. 5421. Couneilmember Borden seconded the motion. Chair Singer concurred. III. INFORMATION/DISCUSSION Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Issues and Opportunitie. s: Solid Waste Supervisor Sharon Conroy introduced guests present and then she and Danielle Pulliam co-presented the slide presentation. Several slides were presented and discussed beginning with the Components of Solid Waste Collection and Disp_ osal. Ms. Pulliam explained that the City's Solid Waste is mandatory by contract and the Recycling is all voluntary by contract. Other topics discussed were: Rtlg.Yr, lillg_Ralm - which are called Diversion Rates ,is the percentage of the TOTAL waste stream being recycled. Pros and Cons There currently are about 16 stations. The majority of the stations are privately owned. The current contract with Waste Management is up for renewal in June 2001. Det~Jnline array of desired services for solid waste & recycling for all sector~. Cost of service stUdy. SF Residential Recycling Opportuni~: Residents of Auburn create 8.1 lbs. of solid waste per day. Countywide averages 4.6 lbs. Per day. Exploring the Curbside Recycling Alternative Costs -survey of all other cities. All figures are based on residential numbers. The cities are in King and Pierce Counties based on one 32- gallon weekly solid waste sen'vice billed monthly. This slide described the various cities, the cost, Solid Waste Mandatory, Recycle Mandatory, Recycle included and the Curb Rate. Pros and Cons Controlling Cost to SF Residential Customer Cost of service study. Rate study. Competitively bid contract. Variable can rate with curbside recycling. Embedded Rate: The cost of a service is included in the garbage bill. ~: Customers are required to pay for a service and Municipal Services Committee Meeting 2 July 17, 2000 Participation Rate: The percentage of the customers that actively participate in a service. Decffeases complaints from customers who do not want the service. Acts as an incentive to participate because residents pay for it anyway. Known to increase diversion rates. SF Residential Recycling Option and lastly discussed was the ~ and~. Discussion ensued. Further discussion ensued regarding whether to send out a survey to Auburn citizens regarding the Recycling Program. It was the consensus of the Committee to not go with the survey and concentrate on the schedule. It was felt that it would be better for the City to spend time, effort and money desiEnlng the program and getting a good rate. Councilmember Borden brought up that she was in favor of a draft resolution stating the Council's support for eurbside recycling. Chair Singer stated that she would work with her on this issue. Councilmember Borden asked if the City could go out for bid perhaps sometime in the spring. Christine Engler explained that a decision has to be made as the program moves along and more information is required to make a detenninatiun as to whether the City is going to re-negotiate the current contract or go out for bid. The City would end up with a deeisiun in a fashion that everyone would know what was going to happen with this particular contract. Christine Engler also explained that in order to make the public aware, a hearing could be held. Christine Engler further explained that if a determination is made that curbside recycling is one of the services to be offered, then what w~uld have to be done is, the consultant's scope of work would have to be put together. Ms. Engler would then bring back the consultant's contract with a request for a budget adjuslment. Communities for Safer Guns Coalition: Jim Kelly stated that this was an added item that Mayor Booth asked him to bring forward for consideration. It's from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and it's a request to sign a document called the "Pledge" for Communities for Safer Guns Coalition. It's basically, adding a criterion in the selection process for firearms that the Aubum Police Department would purchase and that criterion would be whether or not the perspective vendor had agreed to the code of responsible conduct for firearms manufacturers. The last few pages of the handout contain that "Code of Conduct". Obviously, this is a second amendment issue; and a political decision. Chief Kelly stated that he didn't think by signing this particular pledge, that it would necessarily impact Auburn's ability to select the proper firearms. Smith and Wesson is currently the only manufacturer that has agreed to this particular pledge and code of responsible conduct. Municipal Services Committee Meeting 3 July 17, 2000 Auburn Police Department does not issue Smith and Wesson firearms. They issue firearms manufactured by Sig Saner, which is the vendor, which was chosen after an exhaustive study about ten years ago. This does not imply that Auburn would have to re- outfit. Asked what the "pledge" really meant, Chief Kelly replied that again: it was strictly political. Support for the coalition to provide safe homes and safe environment. Most gun retailers are honest, law-abiding, responsible individuals but that perhaps the government wants some control and could only offer his personal comments. He wasn't sure what the intent is from the government to enter into these agreements with the gun manufacturers. Chief Kelly wasn't asking for a decision but he stated that it's something · that the Council should consider whether or not they would like Mayor Booth to support and sign this pledge. Chief Kelly did state that he felt that if Council chooses to support this that signing the pledge would not have a negative impact. Vice Chair Wagner stated that he was troubled by the long list of standards included in the code of responsible conduct and could not support that but thought everything else looked good. Chair Singer stated that she felt time was needed to take a look at this and to talk to the Mayor about it. Chief Kelly had additional copies of the pledge to present to the rest of the Council Members. IV. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:00 PM. Municipal Services Committee Meeting 4 July 17, 2000